Out here on the west coast art fair scene (Wa-Ut-Az-Ca-Nv)we old time full time functional potters have noticed we are not being replacedwith younger folks doing what we do-The question is this only out west oreverywhere?

I do know that collage ceramic programs in general havemostly sifted to art not functional programs thru the 80s and 90s. This hasbeen a fact even with Alfred’s (at one time one of the ground zero spots for functionalpottery) so my Alfred’s alumni friends tell me. We do see a few folks in their40s but we are all mostly in our 50’s and 60’s and rarely see at shows anyonein their 20’s or 30’s selling pottery.

We know its big hard work starting out-all the learning ofthrowing glaze making kilns firing etc .For many of us its our calling and werelish the work

Is it a lack of functional clay education in the system or something else?

This trend has been discussed by many of us for years-Its not a perception but a fact-

Yes there are hobby potters occasionally at shows but we aretalking about salt of the earth full time folks who make the items you useeveryday in the kitchen bath and in the home-not ceramic art but functionalitems

What are your thoughts on this?

I have always considered myself a functional potter. I like to think of how something works, why it works, what it is used for and how to improve it. I have played at this by changing the shape of handles, changing accent lines, basic forms, lips of forms, and so many other things that have always been traditional. Sometimes I return to the classic as they finally make sense, sometimes I prove to myself that my way was acceptable-maybe not better, but equal. I also find that I do forms that are larger, and yet functional. A lamp can be very sculptural, yet is funtional, some would call it decorative, as is water fountains, bird baths, bird houses, umbrella stands, planters, and so many other things. The studio potter can create these decorative items uniquely, each making their own statement, each approaching art, but maybe not accepted as such. At the same time potters can adjust to trends and interests faster than the industry out there, and so often they are the leaders of the new trend then industry comes in and mass produces what the potters started.

I think in the end, there will always be people out there that will want well made, decorative functional art to enhance their lifestyle. They may only be in the 1% maybe more, but they will be there. So I believe that there will also be potters out there that will fill that need.

I'm somewhat new to pottery, though I'm not young. I've been doing production/functional work for several years and have been trained in a professional pottery that does almost exclusively functional work. By this I mean matched glazes, sets, attachments that are intended to be used comfortably, etc. My perception is that the pottery industry is over populated with 'crafters' who really don't amount to much more than pot painters. What are college kids supposed to think when they see so many unskilled potters making a living (so to speak) with point-of-sale clunkery, and are being trained by those very same people? I suspect the profession of pottery has allowed itself to indulge over much in the fair/craft show end where long term customer satisfaction means little or nothing.

Personally, I make a pot with years down the road in mind. I believe my customers will discover new things about a piece they buy from me for years to come. If a potter's goal is to quick sale his/her pottery then the overseas industrial potteries will end up doing the same thing much better in all ways.

My perception is that the pottery industry is over populated with 'crafters' who really don't amount to much more than pot painters. What are college kids supposed to think when they see so many unskilled potters making a living (so to speak) with point-of-sale clunkery, and are being trained by those very same people? I suspect the profession of pottery has allowed itself to indulge over much in the fair/craft show end where long term customer satisfaction means little or nothing.

I would love to see examples of what you call "clunkery" as well as an example of what you believe is enticing/lasting/ever-inspiring about the functional bowls/peices you make.

Just checkin' to be sure I'm doin the clunkery thing "right"!

Jus' sayin'....

Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. Dr. Seuss US author & illustrator (1904 - 1991)

My perception is that the pottery industry is over populated with 'crafters' who really don't amount to much more than pot painters. What are college kids supposed to think when they see so many unskilled potters making a living (so to speak) with point-of-sale clunkery, and are being trained by those very same people? I suspect the profession of pottery has allowed itself to indulge over much in the fair/craft show end where long term customer satisfaction means little or nothing.

I would love to see examples of what you call "clunkery" as well as an example of what you believe is enticing/lasting/ever-inspiring about the functional bowls/peices you make.

Just checkin' to be sure I'm doin the clunkery thing "right"!

Jus' sayin'....

Teardrop, Yedow may be right, but until he/she puts some pictures in the "gallery" section of his/her profile he/she is just someone who is all talk with nothing to back it up.

In light of some of the discussion in this thread about what art schools are or are not teaching, I thought I'd paste this assignment sheet of mine in here for my Wheelworking II course (wheel course taken after the wheel introduction in the Intro level courses).

This next assignment is building directly off of the information and discussions about the three clear, close-up images of handled thrown drinking vessels that you selected and brought into class today for a short presentation and discussion. It is also building off of the information that you learned from addressing the recent “beginnings and endings (feet and lips)” assignment and also the “shaping the center with intent” assignment. Of course, all of these recent assignments have been building upon the core mechanically-based “moving the clay” skills that you have developed in doing so many early simple “pulling cylinders” exercises.

You are to thoughtfully create a set of four (as an absolute minimum) matching handled mugs/cups. These final four presented pieces should be as visually identical as you can possibly make them in all aspects of their design, both form and eventual finish-fired surface. This includes the overall clay weight distribution in the pieces (physical balance). They should also function well as drinking vessels for a hot liquid. As you approach this project, think of a three-dimensional Xerox copy machine (or the Star Trek replicator unit) being used to recreate the selected original piece you have chosen as the most successful variation of your overall design explorations.

This lofty idea is a target working goal for what would represent an absolutely excellent level of final outcome. Do not allow less than such “identical” outcomes to derail the highly important repetitive development process; work in multiples and carefully consider each iteration of the forms. Sketch and digitally record developing forms. Keep the successful aspects of one form, and change the less successful aspects. Move forward with intent and not just vague repetition. You will face challenges with this project; rise to them! That effort will pay off in your future projects also.

Core objectives for this particular assignment include:

The ability to consistently move clay into a given desired form, building core throwing skills.

Refining the ability to visually discern subtle variations in form and surface.

Understanding and utilizing the concept of tightly “working in series”.

The ability to re-compose one form into another, improving formal design aspects with intent.

Balancing the demands of design creativity with the potential constraints of functionality.

Demonstrating an intent-ful approach to the production of ceramic objects.

These four matching pieces should clearly represent a blend of considerations for both visual aesthetic appeal and also of functional drinking and washing-up necessities. As a constraint imposed by this class, you are to keep in mind an American, coffee or tea drinking audience for these works. So the scale should be appropriate to typical average American drinking habits. These are not to be handle-less “teabowls” or “yuniomi”, nor very small demitasse or espresso type cups. For simplicity, they are also not to be paired “coffee cups with saucers”; that added challenge will be a project for another day.

These pieces must be made completely of fired clay, slip, and glaze materials (no mixed media), and the main body of the pieces must be thrown (as at least a starting point). The pieces may have textures or slips applied to the wet clay, if desired. Any of the stock class glazes may be utilized for the Orton cone 9 finish firing, but do consider glaze surface functionality in this regard. The attached handle on these mugs can be created by any forming techniques you might choose, but they must have a handle.

Carefully consider all functional aspects as well as the visual aspects. Pieces must be durable in the food serving arena. Handles must function to easily hold the weight of liquid. Lips must be comfortable to drink from. Forms must be conducive to the flow of liquid in the correct manner. The balance point must be comfortable. Interior glazes must be cleanable and toxicologically safe.

As a possible starting point, consider what you learned from the last two assigmnents and in the associated critique sessions. The nature of general overall forms and also beginning and ending solutions that both you and others developed during those projects might help you approach this assignment so that you “hit the ground running”.

As we have discussed in our various critique sessions, “I like this” or “I love this” is not a sufficient reason to make justifiable conscious visual or functional design choices as you consider making these pieces. Because you have consistently been asked in classes to be able to explain specific characteristics that cause you to “like” a piece, you should now be able to utilize formal design concepts (that you first learned in your 2-D and 3-D design classes) as you explore your development of these forms.

To arrive at the “final four”, likely you will go through many permutations of form ideas before you settle on a basic successful model. This is an expected and necessary part of the process. The more objects you make the more successful the final outcome will be. The idea is to blend a combination of multiple paper sketches and some initial thrown pieces, with careful ongoing visual assessment to resolve your ideas before fully committing to them. Learn from your explorations. “Perfection” on the first try is not a desired goal here.

“Clay and wheel, they teach us”.

HAMADA Shoji

Japanese Living National Treasure in Folk Pottery

These sets of (a minimum of) four matching mugs are to be presented for a formal in-class critique in a leather-hard to bone dry state at the very beginning of class at 8:30 AM sharp on Wednesday, February 22, 2012. These works should be completely finished when shown, with all details fully addressed. Details matter!

Matched Set - Handled Drinking Vessels / Mugs

In looking at some of the things you should be actively addressing as you develop this project, and of course the course grading aspects, the following should help you assess your own direction and performance:

Excellent Performance

Likely more than 4 mugs are presented, and if there are only four, they are completed in every possible nuance of detail. A very high degree of craftsmanship is clearly evident.

Forms are confident and skillfully executed. Exceptional control over the materials is evident. Beginnings and endings are skillfully completed.

The series of presented pieces are very close in all aspects of their visual form, surface treatment, and physical balance.

A high degree of creativity has been demonstrated, while the functionality of the objects as drinking vessels has been upheld strongly. Solutions to aspects such as lips and feet are skillfully considered and executed.

The forms exhibit skillful use of considered design concept application.

Surface treatments are an integral aspect of the overall composition and through their high degree of similarity serve to strongly unify the overall visual presentation.

The mug holds a reasonable American serving of liquid, the lip shape is very pleasant to drink from, and the body shape causes the liquid to easily flow toward the mouth. It is easy to finish the last bit of the serving of liquid. The balance point of the cup appears to be in the spatial center of the form, and it rotates in space around the handle support easily. The handle provides a firm comfortable grip. It is easy to reach the interior for cleaning. The liner glaze surface is easy to clean and contains no toxic materials. There are no easily broken components.

You can clearly and skillfully articulate the design choices you made in developing the four pieces, utilizing appropriate formal design language. You speak with confidence and conviction, and when challenged or questioned, you can use alternate explanations to support or explain your points. You relish suggestions for changes or new approaches.

A large amount of growth in understanding has been accomplished in tackling this assignment.

Adequate Performance

You have four fully completed mugs to present. Almost all possible minor details are attended to. Craftsmanship is solid.

Forms are not all that confidently executed, but a clear effort was made in that direction. There is evidence of a reasonable level of control of the clay, slips, and glazes. Beginnings and endings are considered but may be less than fully successful.

The series of presented pieces are close in most aspects of their visual form, surface treatment, and physical balance. Some subtle variations can be identified upon careful observation.

Some creative solutions have been demonstrated in the design, and the functionality of the objects as drinking vessels has been reasonably considered and accomplished. Creative solutions to aspects such as lips and feet have been considered and executed.

The forms exhibit many careful and considered applications of design concepts.

Surface treatments are clearly a considered aspect of the overall composition and through their basic similarity help to unify the overall visual presentation.

The mug holds a reasonable American serving of liquid, the lip is adequate to drink from, and the shape does not cause difficulty in drinking the liquid nor finishing the last little bit. It is not very difficult to reach the interior for cleaning. The liner glaze surface is easy to clean and contains no toxic materials. The balance point is not quite in the center of the form. The handle provides a reasonable grip. There are few easily broken/ fragile components, although there might be some limited areas of concern.

You can articulate a couple of the design choices you made in developing the four pieces, utilizing appropriate formal design language, but the choices of words are not as specific and clear as they could be. You use some formal design language, but it is limited and occasionally might be slightly mis-applied. Very occasionally, your presentation seems a bit unsure. When questioned or challenged, you can lightly defend your position using alternate explanations. You are receptive to suggestions for changes.

There is evidence of growth in understanding from approaching the assignment.

Poor Performance

You have less than four fully completed mugs to present, or the four pieces are not actually completed and ready to show for the critique. Details are clearly not fully addressed. Work is generally sloppy.

Forms show ineffective shaping of the clay. Evidence of control over the clay, slips, and glazes is missing. Beginnings and endings are not executed well.

The series of presented pieces are not very close in many aspects of visual form, surface treatment, and physical balance. Many variations can be easily identified upon even basic observation.

Little creativity within the bounds of the assignment has been demonstrated, with only very basic solutions evident. The use of the formal elements of visual design are not really demonstrated. The functionality of the objects as drinking vessels has not been considered very well, or the aesthetic aspects of the design significantly compromises the functionality. Little creativity has been applied to aspects such as lips and feet.

The forms exhibit little considered application of formal design concepts.

Surface treatments appear to be an “afterthought” to the forming process and were not part of the overall design considerations. Because of their lack of basic similarity they do not help to unify the overall visual presentation.

The mug is either excessively small or excessively large. The lip is uncomfortable drink from or causes dribbles. The shape of the body causes some difficulty in drinking the liquid or in finishing the last little bit. It is difficult to reach the interior for cleaning. The liner glaze surface is not easy to clean and contains potentially toxic materials. The balance point very much toward the base of the form. The handle does not provide a comfortable grip. There are a number of easily broken/fragile components.

You do not speak clearly about the design choices you made in developing the four pieces, and do not utilize much if any appropriate formal design language. Your choices of words are not specific and clear. Your verbal presentation seems to lack reasonable forethought and structure and many times design concepts are actually stated incorrectly. When challenged or questioned, you tend to resort to saying something like, “I don’t know why” when trying to explain your choices or defend a thought. You are defensive when possible suggestions for changes are made.

This is a bit of a dilemma for me. I just had the best two day Christmas sale I have had in years. I was moving out of that co-operative studio after 26 years though. I just packed up forty mugs for a conference last night. My main gallery just told me that my prices are TOO reasonable. Mugs @ $15.00 If selling out of the studio, I will keep them at $15.00, but bump them up at a gallery. I have been making pots for 36 years, but my main career is teaching art. I only make what I like, don't make any soap dispensers ,butter dishes or chotskas.I make standard plates, teapots that pour,pie dishes etc.I lived in Australia two years ago on a teacher exchange. The pottery scene is pretty much over. Went to Bendigo Pottery. No throwers left, just slip casting. Saw some beautiful former potteries,[I was only allowed to visit 2 a day]. They were all but done. One guy was selling bisqueware, one guy was raising cattle. They are too close to China, and have no trade barriers.I know a few potters in their thirties, but not like the old days.I still think, as Mark C. says, you can still make good pots, at a reasonable price and make a go of it. In two years, I am making full time.Good luck to those starting out. I wish you the best, and hope you can make a go of it.TJR.

Okay, I posted some pics in an album. You must keep in mind that I've only been doing this for about 7 years and I make stuff and sell it, I don't have time to take many pictures (I mostly grabbed some stuff from around the house and uploaded it). I throw between five and eight thousand pounds of clay a year.

When I started there was a Ken Ferguson quote that, if I may paraphrase, said that a potter should first learn technique; then learn form, then glaze/kiln, then surface. I am following that course and hence my comments. It appears to me, and I must stress appears, that potters like to go strait for the glazes and skip the form. So, if I may elaborate: If the pot don't look good nekked it don't look good no matter what

Form and function are the struggles of a functional potter. The other guys make vases and flat bottom bowls. They make attachments that are hard on people with arthritic hands or only fit big or small hands. The unification of form and function is pottery. You can glaze a rock and sell it. But functional pottery that is more than a decoration is hard work and is done by those who love to have people use their pots.

I've seen good potters. I personally think that Robin Hopper has it figured out and has mastered a craft that few have. There are things going on in Seagrove that blow my mind they are so good. But 90% of the pottery I've seen really isn't very good. I'm not trying to be mean in any way. I guess what I was really getting at is that it is hard to make a living as a potter when you have people doing the bigger, brighter, wider thing in the stall next to you, selling stuff that folks aren't going to use when they get it home since it will never be comfortable in the hands and doesn't have any long term appeal. I think such 'craftsmen' put pottery in a negative light. Pottery is spoiled by flash, in my humble opinion, it is the earth. To be the earth it must be enduring and deep.

Okay, I posted some pics in an album. You must keep in mind that I've only been doing this for about 7 years and I make stuff and sell it, I don't have time to take many pictures (I mostly grabbed some stuff from around the house and uploaded it). I throw between five and eight thousand pounds of clay a year.

When I started there was a Ken Ferguson quote that, if I may paraphrase, said that a potter should first learn technique; then learn form, then glaze/kiln, then surface. I am following that course and hence my comments. It appears to me, and I must stress appears, that potters like to go strait for the glazes and skip the form. So, if I may elaborate: If the pot don't look good nekked it don't look good no matter what

Form and function are the struggles of a functional potter. The other guys make vases and flat bottom bowls. They make attachments that are hard on people with arthritic hands or only fit big or small hands. The unification of form and function is pottery. You can glaze a rock and sell it. But functional pottery that is more than a decoration is hard work and is done by those who love to have people use their pots.

I've seen good potters. I personally think that Robin Hopper has it figured out and has mastered a craft that few have. There are things going on in Seagrove that blow my mind they are so good. But 90% of the pottery I've seen really isn't very good. I'm not trying to be mean in any way. I guess what I was really getting at is that it is hard to make a living as a potter when you have people doing the bigger, brighter, wider thing in the stall next to you, selling stuff that folks aren't going to use when they get it home since it will never be comfortable in the hands and doesn't have any long term appeal. I think such 'craftsmen' put pottery in a negative light. Pottery is spoiled by flash, in my humble opinion, it is the earth. To be the earth it must be enduring and deep.

Nice handles on the mugs, Yedrow.Thank you I will get more pics of functional work up as I may. I tend to only have pics of my 'adventures in clay'. My day to day work gets made, accounted for, and put on the floor, in fairly short order.

Juli, Thousands of mugs, lol. I make them the way I was trained, I role up a ball, squeeze it into a carrot, slap it down once on each side to flatten it out and elongate it a little, cut the big end off, then stick it on the mug and pull it out. Negative space is as important to me as anything else on a handle.

Not to high-jack the tread, but ...how much of the work out there classified by the makers are really ART?(I saw the same in the glass beadmaking world - 'I am an artist.' And I think to myself, 'Really?'

I slipcast. But please, do not stone me for admitting that. I believe & maintain that I have every right to call my work handmade. These 2 hands sent hours on a potter's wheel creating a plaster master, and then make the molds. I mix and pour my slip myself. I decast & fettle myself. I glaze myself. does it take less time than throwing on the wheel? No, no and no.

Ceramics in my country is also going the same route as in the USA. Art seem to be the thing. Sculpting, etc over functionality. and yet, the buyers here prefer spending their money on functional handmade stuff (even though it is sometimes slipcasted :-)

Diana I am with you. In order to compete and that is what we are talking about is Competing with China.

This is what I decided to do:

I pay my self $2.00 an hour. I make molds out of my work and slipcase them, which I pick one from my work -one in ten are good, not all get a mold made.Now, I made 4 cups yesterday took me under an hour, including clean-up. ( I am not very good at throwing, used to be 25 years ago) One is decent enough for a mold to be made.

Firing: I take a class for a stupid price and can fire my piece.

So what can I charge for the cup? I probably use $.50 - .70 in glaze -if that.So far I have $2.50 - $2.70 in this cup.

Even if I run my own small kiln and fill it up it would be $1.00…. cost about $12.00 to run my little kiln I can fit 8 to 10 cups inside. More expensive than the classes firing I take. I do not do it at home.

Now we are at $3.70 in the class, $.4.70 for me to do it.Now what can I charge and be somewhat competitive to China?Can I get $5.00 - 6.00 per cup? Am I competing with China? Would more people be willing to pay a dollar more for a cup from an American potter? If I make a sign that says I compete with China, will that help my marketing?The more I throw the faster I can make my pots. These prices should drop.

I work with slip casting also, some molds we make and some we buy. We do some nifty glazing, definitely not just dunking. And we sell pretty well. For years at the local Renn Faire we made about 20,000 per season. Now selling at other types of shows, some art fairs, some SF conventions, etc., we don't make as much in any given week, but it adds up over the longer selling season. All of our pieces are functional. The best sellers are mugs, goblets and other drinking vessels. if we were to sell online as well, we would be glad to add 5,000 to the year's income!Obviously, this is a second income stream, but it would be hard to be without it.

Interesting discussion. I had a career in TV and came to pottery in my 50s - so can't comment on why young people aren't taking it up - but I can assume that it's because it's very difficult to make a living at it!
Just wanted to chime in here, though, about ETSY and Mea's comment about number crunching. I spend a lot of time on Etsy and in the forums there (I have a shop) and I can tell you that a lot of Etsy potters don't count on Etsy only for their sales. Yes they are social media super stars etc and do well there -- but most also do fairs and festivals and have websites they sell from, as well. So Etsy is just part of their income. But you can bet that the superstars on Etsy are super stars outside Etsy too -- they are a motivated bunch. Very impressive.
But I agree -- the sales volume on Etsy for most is small to moderate. I use it as a lab really, to test ideas and shapes and themes. I can't imagine selling huge volumes there -- for the reasons already discussed -- more time packing and shipping, than making, once the numbers get high!